The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Corporal punishment on a girl? (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=206280)

StarGirl January 22nd, 2010 8:06 PM

Corporal punishment on a girl?
 
Is necessary a girl having a corporal punishment

Esper January 22nd, 2010 8:19 PM

Is it necessary for a girl to receive corporal punishment?

I don't think girls are more or less deserving of it, but then I don't think it's right for any children to be hit for any reason.

What if a parent/other authority figure got too angry and hit too hard?

Uecil January 22nd, 2010 8:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea (Post 5493146)
Is it necessary for a girl to receive corporal punishment?

I don't think girls are more or less deserving of it, but then I don't think it's right for any children to be hit for any reason.

What if a parent/other authority figure got too angry and hit too hard?

i agree with Galatea on this one

icomeanon6 January 22nd, 2010 8:42 PM

I'm going to assume that you're talking about a young girl receiving corporal punishment from one of her parents. Corporal punishment's a pretty touchy subject. I think that it can be okay depending on the circumstance. My parents used to spank us when we really screwed up, and I think we're better off because of it. If the issue here has less to do with whether corporal punishment is right or wrong and more to do with whether there should be different standards for boys or girls, I don't see why it should be okay for boys but not for girls.

Punishment is an integral part of child development. Young children need to learn their mistakes, and at too young an age they can't do so on their own reliably. It is important for parents to use punishment responsibly and in an appropriate quantity and severity. Corporal punishment should be used seldom, and it should never be used in anger or just to make the child feel pain. A single, quick spank should be all it takes for the message to get across.

FreakyLocz14 January 22nd, 2010 9:08 PM

I'm all for equality! So if there's going to be corporal punishment (which I disapprove of) then it should be administered equally.

StarGirl January 22nd, 2010 9:24 PM

so...is really important for girl having a corporal punishment or not?

BHwolfgang January 22nd, 2010 9:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarGirl (Post 5493270)
so...is really important for girl having a corporal punishment or not?

It's important for a child to recieve corporal punishment for doing something really bad. If not, they would never learn their lesson, unless if the parent are really good at explaining things.

It should be used seldom, because it's not always the answer.

True Reign January 22nd, 2010 9:34 PM

Seriously? I would you ask this? Every guy I've met in my life has complained at least once how 'unfair' it is. Girls aren't equal to men. They're now superior in today's society.

In my opinion, and my opinion alone, girls should have any and every consequence a man gets from breaking rules. There shouldn't be any "Okay since your a ____ I'll forget about it". NO. There should be no boundaries between females and males. We are the same, so therefore we, as equals, deserve equilibrium in every and any sense in the law.

StarGirl January 22nd, 2010 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zet (Post 5493304)
Which type of Corporal Punishment are we talking about?

Parental/Domestic corporal punishment?
School corporal punishment?
Judicial corporal punishment?

When I was a kid, I received a few spanking for when I did something wrong because I didn't know that was something that I shouldn't have done. So it's really helping a child to understand right from wrong and understand the punishments that can happen. Of course a kid wouldn't receive a really harsh punishment like something that's Judicial because they are just a kid and not an adult. But I guess without it, some kids grow stealing stuff and doing what ever the hell they want, so there's no reason a girl should be excluded just because they're a girl.

And I'm not saying that I'm all for Corporal Punishment, but their is a fine line from when a child should be spanked and when they shouldn't be spanked. An example would be if they stole something and kept doing it, they should receive a spanking but if they're crying out loud in public because they want to go home, then they shouldn't be spanked, slapped or receive anything else but just a small talk about why they're out in public and that they'll be going home soon.

And Corporal Punishment for an adult, well I guess that would only come down to murder and other serious crimes, why let someone walk away from any punishment while someone else suffers? Let's say if you're best friend or a family member you loved was killed and the killer got 3 years in jail and not anything harsher? You would want them to understand the pain they caused, wouldn't you?

And as for school punishments, I think detention is fine, but if it continues then I guess that calls for a suspension and so on.

what about judicial corporal punishment for girl

Luck January 22nd, 2010 10:36 PM

I don't see why people have to be exempt from punishment just because of an insignificant factor.
That seems kinda...prejudiced to me.
So yeah, of course.

The Cynic January 23rd, 2010 4:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drizzle (Post 5493283)
It's important for a child to recieve corporal punishment for doing something really bad. If not, they would never learn their lesson, unless if the parent are really good at explaining things.

It should be used seldom, because it's not always the answer.

I coundn't disagree more. How can you teach a child what is wrong through pain? Violence of any kind is just immoral first of all. And second of all if the child has been violent (hit brother etc.) how is hitting him/her back going to prove anything.

Lady Gaga January 23rd, 2010 5:51 AM

I believe that males and females are equal, and what happens to one sex should happen to the other. There is nothing special about having a vagina and a high-pitched voice that one will not experience the same discipline as a boy, which in the long-run may help them.

I am am against the idea of corporal punishment, but that was just to answer your question.

Mewtwolover January 23rd, 2010 6:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea (Post 5493146)
I don't think it's right for any children to be hit for any reason.

I agree with you. It's wrong and illegal.

iLaxbe! January 23rd, 2010 6:28 AM

OMG, people! Go watch Super Nanny!

(I know I should post my opinion in this thread, but it's too disgusting for me.)

Jolene January 23rd, 2010 7:10 AM

I was never smacked as a child. Resorting to that is just lazy parenting, in my opinion. You can either teach them right from wrong with firm words and witholding their privileges to teach them the consequences of their actions, or you can just lazily hit them.

Pokémon Ranger ✩ Moriarty January 23rd, 2010 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea (Post 5493146)
Is it necessary for a girl to receive corporal punishment?

I don't think girls are more or less deserving of it, but then I don't think it's right for any children to be hit for any reason.

What if a parent/other authority figure got too angry and hit too hard?

I agree. I also think the corporal punishment doesn't teach the receiver anything other than violence as a solution to everything. IMHO, only lazy parents and authority figures use it; rather than attempt to communicate with their child or ward, they simply lash out at them instead.

Luck January 23rd, 2010 1:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Cynic (Post 5493701)
I coundn't disagree more. How can you teach a child what is wrong through pain? Violence of any kind is just immoral first of all. And second of all if the child has been violent (hit brother etc.) how is hitting him/her back going to prove anything.

It teaches the child about consequences, and I'd assume that it also works as a threat. It never worked for me or my friends, but there are exceptions to the rule.

Quote:

I agree with you. It's wrong and illegal.
Not in America. The farthest you'll go is corporal punishment being banned in schools only.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokémon Ranger ✩ Moriarty (Post 5494425)
IMHO, only lazy parents and authority figures use it


What? Lazy parents don't do anything, strict parents do that.

Jolene January 23rd, 2010 1:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luck (Post 5494556)
What? Lazy parents don't do anything, strict parents do that.

It's lazy compared to other methods of disciplining a child, such as listening to the child's feelings about why they're angry to calm them down, and making them empathize with the person whose feelings they've hurt, or even just giving them a time out or grounding them for awhile. That's how my parents disciplined me and now I'm hardly ever naughty.

It's kind of bad parenting to hit a child, because hitting might eventually become the only type of punishment that the child will respond to, so when she is in school, where teachers can't hit her, she will be pretty much uncontrollable.

Shouting at your child is also bad parenting, because it teaches her that shouting gets people what they want. You can definitely discipline a child without hitting them or shouting at them.

Heart~Bunny January 23rd, 2010 3:02 PM

I don't believe in corporal punishment at all. Let's say I don't like getting hit. Then again my mother only hits me when she is drunk and pissed at something else and lashes out at me. I think if you get hit as a child there is a chance you will hit your own child even if they don't do anything.. just because you are pissed and you got hit when you were a child by your parent because they got mad.

magikarptrainer January 23rd, 2010 10:24 PM

Raise a girl rich and a boy poor.

twocows January 23rd, 2010 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Cynic (Post 5493701)
I coundn't disagree more. How can you teach a child what is wrong through pain? Violence of any kind is just immoral first of all. And second of all if the child has been violent (hit brother etc.) how is hitting him/her back going to prove anything.

Why don't you keep your version of morality out of my home? "All violence is bad" is not a universal truth, it's an opinion. If you want to force your morals down other peoples' throats, go start a religion.

Speaking of religion, I believe a number of them bring up the idea of "reciprocity," or the idea that if you do something wrong, something wrong will be done back to you (karma, "eye for an eye," etc). I'll tell you why you spank your child if they're being a horrible little monster: they'll learn that it's something they shouldn't do. If you just tell them that it's wrong, they don't really care or understand; there's no motivation for them NOT to do it again, so why shouldn't they? Positive/negative reinforcement by itself is useless; you need to add punishment, or your child won't understand (not to mention they won't be prepared for reality, where actions actually do have consequences). If the child is being good and helping others, reward him or her; if he or she is bullying other children and disrespecting adults, punish him or her.

The Cynic January 24th, 2010 4:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twocows (Post 5495968)
Why don't you keep your version of morality out of my home? "All violence is bad" is not a universal truth, it's an opinion. If you want to force your morals down other peoples' throats, go start a religion.

Speaking of religion, I believe a number of them bring up the idea of "reciprocity," or the idea that if you do something wrong, something wrong will be done back to you (karma, "eye for an eye," etc). I'll tell you why you spank your child if they're being a horrible little monster: they'll learn that it's something they shouldn't do. If you just tell them that it's wrong, they don't really care or understand; there's no motivation for them NOT to do it again, so why shouldn't they? Positive/negative reinforcement by itself is useless; you need to add punishment, or your child won't understand (not to mention they won't be prepared for reality, where actions actually do have consequences). If the child is being good and helping others, reward him or her; if he or she is bullying other children and disrespecting adults, punish him or her.

b..b...b...but I was only expressing my opinion like I have the right to do so. I'm not shoving my opinions down people's throats. My belief is that you can believ whatever you want as long as you do not force those beliefs on other people. For example, I don't believe in private education. But if I had a son/daughter and I thought private education was the best thing for them or they were old enough to decide for themselves, I would let them go to private school. I do not force my beliefs upon people. I was merely giving my opinion. Everyone has the right to both agree and disagree OK?

Corvus of the Black Night January 24th, 2010 4:44 AM

If a man's going to get it for the same crime, a woman better be getting it as well. /lolurasexist

I'll admit, I was raised in a household where I still get physically whacked across the head for doing something wrong, but am I an emotionally torn or bloodthirsty monster for it? Naw. Corporal punishment isn't wrong until it crosses the line to abuse or torture - even a whacking with a belt or stick can be okay as long as it is a rare occurrence and only used to punish the worst offenses.

There may be psychological effects from such punishments, but unless the person is psychologically unstable in the first place, a whack with the hand isn't going to cause them to hate the world and bathe in the blood of their own parents. Hell, the pain and the mark of even a belt or stick goes away after a day or two - it's nothing permanent (if not done too harshly) but it does help kids learn not to throw the cat out of the apartment window. The thing is, for any kind of punishment (or praise, for that matter) to work, it must be consistent - if child does action A, child receives reaction B.

Parents are such pussies these days.

Jolene January 24th, 2010 5:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twocows (Post 5495968)
I'll tell you why you spank your child if they're being a horrible little monster: they'll learn that it's something they shouldn't do. If you just tell them that it's wrong, they don't really care or understand; there's no motivation for them NOT to do it again, so why shouldn't they?

Not true. Physical punishment has been proven to be no more effective than other forms of discipline. Most child psychologists do no recommend spanking as a form of punishment for children. If you grew up in a household where physical punishment was the norm, then I can understand why you might think that it's the most effective way to discipline a child, but it's not. In fact, it preconditions children to rely on violence.


Quote:

Originally Posted by twocows (Post 5495968)
Positive/negative reinforcement by itself is useless; you need to add punishment, or your child won't understand (not to mention they won't be prepared for reality, where actions actually do have consequences).

And there are other forms of punishment. Better forms of punishment.

Avatar January 24th, 2010 6:31 AM

A 14 year old shouldn't be giving advice on parenting as if they know what they're talking about.

Corvus of the Black Night January 24th, 2010 6:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolene (Post 5496281)
Not true. Physical punishment has been proven to be no more effective than other forms of discipline. Most child psychologists do no recommend spanking as a form of punishment for children. If you grew up in a household where physical punishment was the norm, then I can understand why you might think that it's the most effective way to discipline a child, but it's not. In fact, it preconditions children to rely on violence.

First, please give us proof besides "DOCTOR JOE" told us so, and second, psychology is one of those sciences that can really go either way so a psychologist's word is just about as good as that crack addict in the alley's.

Quote:

And there are other forms of punishment. Better forms of punishment.
YOU. GET IN YOUR TIME OUT CHAIR. NOW.

...What do you mean you're just gonna walk off? I want to put you in your time out chair! Hey! Where are you going? *picks you up and places you back in chair*

STAY.

...

DAMMIT YOU'RE WALKING OFF AGAIN

LadyJirachu January 24th, 2010 6:38 AM

Spankity, Spankity...

The weaker the girl, the tougher it should be, I guess. Then they can marry a cry baby! I want a cry baby for a boyfriend...*drool's*

Takoto January 24th, 2010 6:53 AM

Corporal punishment? It depends. If it's within the family, say a parent, then nether boys nor girls should receive it, in my mind that's filed under abuse. Your kid does something wrong? Yell at them, send them to their room, ground 'em, take away their games consoles, that's all fine, but physical violence? That's abuse. Nothing else. You should never hit someone else, even if they have done something wrong.

If it's in the sense of the law, lets say, if a man OR woman kicked a Police officer and resisted arrest? The police using physical force would be okay. I'm sick of this stereotype that girls a weaker than boys and shouldn't be hit. Hah. Screw that. I'm a girl, and I have near-no physical strength and I punched a boy the same ages as me (15) and sent him crying (this was because, he was bullying my ex girlfriend and I for over a year, and in the end I lost my temper, not saying it was the right thing to do though, that's a matter of opinion). Girls may look frail, but, like boys, if provoked, they can be massive *****es or cause a lot of pain.

Corvus of the Black Night January 24th, 2010 7:19 AM

... Corporal punishment IS physical violence.

o.o

From personal experience I can tell you that being whacked across the face usually makes me afraid of my parents... for like 30 minutes. I knew I was doing something wrong and it was done so I don't do it again, because even though it's not going to leave a permement mark on either my body or my psyche (unlike things I have done to myself), it's still enough to make you think twice about doing it. When they pull this "i'm gonna take it away" bullcrap, I usually find a way to circumnavigate it, making the punishment useless.

Is it wrong to get hit on the hand if you're gonna stuff it in a socket? I don't think taking your Xbox is going to stop you from doing that. It's not really abuse unless it's going to hurt them forever. There's a difference between a slap on the behind and pinning someone to the floor with nails.

Jesus Christ walks into a hotel...

It's pretty clear what the difference between punishment and abuse/torture is :p

Jolene January 24th, 2010 8:01 AM

http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/familydevelopment/components/7266a.html

Quote:

It is inconsistent (and confusing) to tell a child that inflicting pain and being violent is inappropriate and then to inflict pain to modify that child's behavior. How can a child possibly be sensitive to subtle nuances such as that inflicting pain is sometimes justified but sometimes not?
Quote:

Being spanked as children increases the probability of their hitting others now at home and in the neighborhood and later as adults.

Perhaps the most frequent and powerful relationship demonstrated by research is that between physical punishment and aggressive acting-out of the child—both now as a child in relations with sibs, peers, parents, and others . . . and later as an adult in all their relations (but especially with spouse and children).

Hitting children models violent behavior, teaching them
  • that hitting others is morally correct (after all that is what their own parents do) when those others are doing "something wrong" and won't stop
  • that the way to deal with annoyance is to hit
  • that being angry and "beyond yourself" justifies hitting.

Quote:

Spanking hinders development of empathy and compassion, because the child focuses on his/her own pain rather than on the effect of his/her behavior on others. The natural human reaction to feeling threatened or being hurt is a flood of anger and/or fear that psychologists call the "fight or flight" reaction. It ensures that your child cannot listen, think, or feel remorseful.

twocows January 24th, 2010 9:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolene (Post 5496281)
Not true. Physical punishment has been proven to be no more effective than other forms of discipline. Most child psychologists do no recommend spanking as a form of punishment for children. If you grew up in a household where physical punishment was the norm, then I can understand why you might think that it's the most effective way to discipline a child, but it's not. In fact, it preconditions children to rely on violence.

The so-called "evidence" that supports this hypothesis is fundamentally flawed, and there is as much evidence (if not more) that suggests the contrary; that spanking your child better conditions them for reality. According to a study by Marjorie Gunnoe from my home town of Grand Rapid, Michigan, spanked children are often happier and more academically successful than children who have never been spanked, so long as they are not being spanked into their teen years (1, 2). Now, there are studies that seem to contradict these findings, but it turns out that many of them are based on results collected from teenagers who are still spanked, which usually only happens when proper discipline has not been established beforehand, and tends to inspire resentment rather than understanding (3). As it turns out, combined with proper parenting methods, spanking and corporal punishment can be useful in the home and (provided the parenting doesn't contradict it), in the school as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Cynic (Post 5496207)
b..b...b...but I was only expressing my opinion like I have the right to do so. I'm not shoving my opinions down people's throats. My belief is that you can believ whatever you want as long as you do not force those beliefs on other people. For example, I don't believe in private education. But if I had a son/daughter and I thought private education was the best thing for them or they were old enough to decide for themselves, I would let them go to private school. I do not force my beliefs upon people. I was merely giving my opinion. Everyone has the right to both agree and disagree OK?

If you intended it as such, then I apologize for misreading what you wrote. I know a great many pacifists who seem to think that it's perfectly tolerable to try and force their beliefs on others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolene (Post 5496577)
http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/familydevelopment/components/7266a.html

This "study," if you can even call it that (it's more a collection of rhetoric than anything), is highly biased and uses statistical lying to skew the facts.

"Many (if not most) of the studies which purport to find corporal punishment to be "beneficial"/effective (Larzelere) studied it as a way to stop or correct misbehavior. And it will; we don't question that."
The study I linked didn't study this at all; in fact, it studied how happy children were farther down the line, and showed that there was no statistically relevant reason to conclude that spanking hurts children, and that there is statistically significant evidence that shows that children are indeed happier.

"We don't know precisely where to draw the line between "acceptable physical punishment as discipline" and child abuse. NOTE: Robert Larzelere, one of the most frequently quoted supporters of spanking (among researchers), limits "acceptable corporal punishment" to two swats on the seat with an open hand."
Any reasonable person knows the difference between punishment and torture.

"Some 70% of child abuse cases were attempts to discipline through the use of physical punishment that escalated out of control. (Kadushin & Martin; Straus)"
This "fact" is a prime example of manipulating statistics. It doesn't tell, at all, how often physical punishment actually turns into abuse (a number I would imagine to be far, far lower than 70%; potentially less than 0.0001%). It relies on the shock value of such a high number to try and support the hypothesis that "physical punishment leads to abuse a statistically significant amount of the time," but this hypothesis isn't even tested.

"Although much corporal punishment is of low intensity and frequency, its range is wide and the most severe end is clearly abusive. A major problem, as noted above, is that one cannot easily specify where "appropriate" punishment fades into abuse. It is because of this difficulty of "drawing the line", that we have chosen to argue for NO hitting of children."
So we can't leave the decision up to reasonable people? If they can't be trusted with knowing the difference between proper punishment and torture, how in the world do you expect them to raise a child at all?

The paper does a good enough job of refuting (or not supporting) its own points for "short and medium-range consequences." The misuse of the (very few) statistics provided is obvious, but I'll spell them out anyway.

"72% of Goodhue county parents admitted that their children, at least sometimes, repeated the behavior for which they were spanked. More striking, 34% indicated this happens half the time or more."
This fails to take into account the recurrence rate for parents who do not spank their children, which could very well be higher.

"The basic reason for this, according to research, is that children of non-spanking parents tend to control their behavior on the basis of what is right or wrong; spanked children control their behavior out of fear—to avoid being hit. Instead of learning to differentiate between right and wrong, they learn to differentiate only what does and doesn't result in a spanking."
Research doesn't provide reasons, it provides facts. If this study did anything more than comment on the data and tell whether it rejected or failed to reject the null hypothesis (and perhaps offer a SUGGESTION as to why the data turned out the way it did), then the study itself is fundamentally biased.

"Pediatrician Dr. J. Donald Walcher points out that, in his experience, there is little effectiveness in trying to make any explanation at the onset of a disciplinary action."
I don't know about his experience, but I know about my experience. I was always aware why I was receiving punishment. Also, it seems to me this is a (flawed) argument against punishment in general.

"It is inconsistent (and confusing) to tell a child that inflicting pain and being violent is inappropriate and then to inflict pain to modify that child's behavior. How can a child possibly be sensitive to subtle nuances such as that inflicting pain is sometimes justified but sometimes not?"
This is what you're trying to teach the child! You're trying to teach them what actions are appropriate and what actions are not! It is up to the parent to get the child to understand why violence is tolerable in one situation (American forces in World War II, for example), whereas another situation is intolerable (the German forces in World War II).

"Perhaps the most frequent and powerful relationship demonstrated by research is that between physical punishment and aggressive acting-out of the child—both now as a child in relations with sibs, peers, parents, and others . . . and later as an adult in all their relations (but especially with spouse and children)."
If it's so frequent, then why can't the author find a single citation of this relationship?

"Several research studies have found that 40-50 percent of people, when asked how they felt when they were spanked, reported that they "hated the parent.""
I hated my parents when they were spanking me, too. You'd be crazy not to. You get over it and learn not to repeat your actions. Nowhere is there a reference that says that prolonged resentment is an effect, and thus the next two statements he makes are invalid.

"Research by Straus and many others has shown relationships between spanking and many undesirable outcomes"
And yet the study I linked contradicts this "fact," despite the author not setting out to prove or disprove a hypothesis related to it (she merely commented on a trend in the data). Given Straus' data set and the mistakes that I was able to point out, I'd open up the possibility that his study was poorly conducted, potentially due to bias on his part.

"Spanking as a sole or major mode of discipline throughout childhood makes it more difficult for parents to influence children later on, especially in adolescence, when physical force is no longer possible."
This is not the reason why spanking is not recommended past a certain age; it is because of the earlier-cited "resentment" (which was never properly explained, and only vaguely referenced as a way to support a ridiculous theory). Children older than 10 resent spanking and corporal punishment for a number of reasons; I personally felt that I was "too old" for spankings, and that it would be silly for my parents to spank me once I understood the difference between what was appropriate and inappropriate. Other forms of punishment for when I willfully screwd up still made sense, and were applied appropriately.

The statements I didn't address lacked any sourcing whatsoever and weren't worth my time to address.

Esper January 24th, 2010 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hark! It's the Ferryman Charon (Post 5496235)
There may be psychological effects from such punishments, but unless the person is psychologically unstable in the first place, a whack with the hand isn't going to cause them to hate the world and bathe in the blood of their own parents.

I'm sorry, but what child is psychologically stable? I don't mean to say that children are wild beasts - there are some remarkably mature children out there - but they are still kids and are still developing along with all the other children who pinch their sisters and get into mom's makeup. Even being psychologically stable doesn't protect you from harm. You may not turn into Jeffrey Dahmer, but you can still get messed up (make it hard to empathize with others, etc.). It's not guaranteed you'll get messed up if your parents spank you or worse (since there are some members here who are apparently stable and well-adjusted despite getting a few slaps or more), but just because you came out unscathed doesn't mean it can't happen to someone else.

twocows January 24th, 2010 1:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea (Post 5497010)
You may not turn into Jeffrey Dahmer, but you can still get messed up (make it hard to empathize with others, etc.). It's not guaranteed you'll get messed up if your parents spank you or worse (since there are some members here who are apparently stable and well-adjusted despite getting a few slaps or more), but just because you came out unscathed doesn't mean it can't happen to someone else.

If you don't use corporal punishment, you may not turn into Jeffrey Dahmer, but you can still get messed up (make it hard to respect authority, not understand that there are real consequences to unacceptable actions, etc). It's not guaranteed you'll get messed up if your parents don't spank you or worse (since there are some members here who are mostly stable and well-adjusted despite not getting proper punishment), but just because you came out mostly unscathed doesn't mean it can't happen to someone else.

Åzurε January 24th, 2010 9:00 PM

I like how how physically disciplined children "are", and unspanked children "tend to be". Just a detail. I'm all for the occasional swat, and if I have something to say (that 2cows hasn't already said), I'll say it...

Nick January 24th, 2010 9:17 PM

A degree of punishment shouldn't be determined by your sex. In most cases, however, girls are less likely to receive any kind of corporal punishment than boys, especially in the home. That's just the way it is for most families, that I've come to know. I think that corporal punishment at home is the only form of corporal punishment that should be tolerable (apart from the death penalty, in the judicial system), but to a minimum and only when necessary. Most people would reply stating that it "isn't" necessary, but for some children, its the only method of punishment that they will respond and learn from. In truth it depends on the child and how they cope with different forms of punishment.

For myself, it requires a simple word to discipline me (though since I've grown older and rather stubborn, that's not the case anymore). For my brothers, it requires a belt or a slap. Especially for my youngest brother, who just doesn't know when to shut up and do what he's told. He responds negatively to someone telling him what to do as well as getting yelled at for not doing what he's told. The only way you can get him to do something is if you use force. Taking away things from children only makes matters worse in situations.

I don't think its right to get into a true physical confrontation with your child, however, over disciplining them. I've already been in that situation with my father and, although it really helped situate a lot of opinions and indifference with each other (mainly on his part), I'd much rather talk though something like that with my parent, or anyone for that matter. I've only been in two physical confrontations with my father, though, so... In both situations, however, it wasn't a physical confrontation that was made from discipline but rather tension, and a lot of angry words being shouted from both ends of the confrontation.

Anyway, I'm drifting from the topic. My point: your sex should not determine, despite how much it already does, the punishment you deserve from a crime or mistake you committed, but physicality should be a last resort in any situation (in a home setting). Any other form of corporate punishment, especially in schools, should be illegal.

Corvus of the Black Night January 25th, 2010 3:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea (Post 5497010)
I'm sorry, but what child is psychologically stable? I don't mean to say that children are wild beasts - there are some remarkably mature children out there - but they are still kids and are still developing along with all the other children who pinch their sisters and get into mom's makeup. Even being psychologically stable doesn't protect you from harm. You may not turn into Jeffrey Dahmer, but you can still get messed up (make it hard to empathize with others, etc.). It's not guaranteed you'll get messed up if your parents spank you or worse (since there are some members here who are apparently stable and well-adjusted despite getting a few slaps or more), but just because you came out unscathed doesn't mean it can't happen to someone else.

It's true to suggest that children are both impressionable and susceptible to negative stimuli, but a spank on the behind isn't something that's normally going to churn out messed up adults. Considering that many people have been doing it for hundreds of years to discipline their children (oftentimes much worse than what we do today) and they didn't have more emotionally unstable or unsympathetic adults, it's pretty silly to think that now, all the sudden, we as a race simply are not psychologically capable of taking this physical pain anymore. I can understand constant, irregular and/or abusive punishment and how that would affect one's psyche, but a whack here and there to punish a behaviour in a consistent fashion does not usually result in the destruction of one's well being. It's when this punishment becomes inconsistent when problems arise.

If one is to accurately determine the effectiveness of Corporal punishment, one must create a study that acknowledges the difference between consistent and inconsistent punishments.

As I said, adults are total pussies these days.

Pokémon Ranger ✩ Moriarty January 25th, 2010 3:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luck (Post 5494556)
What? Lazy parents don't do anything, strict parents do that.

Lazy parents do as little as they can. Smacking your child across the face is far easier than sitting them down and trying to communicate with them.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:23 PM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.